Why can't we nab the suspects?
Vigilante justice should never be the answer. It sounds good until you get the wrong guy by mistake. This is why we need a government, which provides fair trials.
I don't know about anyone else (Boondock Saints playing the overall idea here) if I heard about say a sex trafficker out on parole or just got out of jail and say he was murdered, would I have any remorse? No. Would I think justice was served in the murder/killing? Yes.
Is it justice in the modern sense? No. Is it justice when people get the beauty of the American justice system by the unlimited appeal system? Is it justice when the harlot of justice(my disgust with so called justice will not leave me for awhile at this present time) is blind but peaks due to the age of the offended in sexual crimes and both the defense and the prosecuting attorney creates a situation where there is no justice? Is it vengeance? Maybe. Eye for an eye comes into play here and since a loss was created, a loss is taken...just like with property or capital.
Then again I can agree with you. Yet even though I support let's say the death penalty(I do btw), your own argument goes against that and its a reliable argument.
I would like to believe that all trials are fair but I don't and won't for a good time now so sometimes I personally see the vigilante as the one who succeeds where fair justice doesn't. The topic at hand is one of them topics I'd put under reasonable reasons to react in a vigilante manner. It doesn't make me feel good, but fair justice is sometimes too fair in my opinion.
Upvote
0